The proposed enactment is unlikely to be taken seriously by the Narendra Modi-headed BJP government with a comfortable majority. But there can be no doubt that if enacted, Tharoor’s Bill would go a long way in promoting equality and preventing discrimination not only against Muslims but every vulnerable segment of India’s citizenry.

The Sachar Committee’s mandate was to prepare a comprehensive report on the ‘Social, Economic and Educational Status of the Muslim Community in India’ and to make necessary recommendations for addressing issues related to the socio-economic backwardness of the community.

The Committee’s report submitted in November 2006 highlighted the fact that Indian Muslims were victims of institutionalised discrimination and suggested several short and long-term remedial measures. In 2007 the then UPA government tabled the report in Parliament and declared its intent to act upon all the Committee’s recommendations.
However, as several reports have since pointed out, the actions taken have at best been token in nature.

Between 2007 and 2014, when the UPA government was voted out of power, the recommendation for an Equal Opportunities Commission was tossed around between the Ministry for Minorities Affairs, National Commission for Human Rights and the National SC/ST Commission before being altogether forgotten.

Whether the national scene would have been altogether different had a law of the kind now suggested by Tharoor been enacted during the pendency of the UPA regime is now a matter of conjecture. However, his private Bill has within it the clear possibility of placing before citizens a promising counter-narrative.

The overarching aim of the Bill is to promote equality and prevent harassment, boycott, segregation, discriminatory violence and victimisation of any targeted group of persons based on caste, ethnicity, race, sex, gender identity, pregnancy, sexual orientation, religion and belief, tribe, disability, linguistic identity, HIV status, nationality, marital status, food preference, skin tone, place of birth or residence, age.

In addition, it includes any group of persons suffering widespread and substantial social, economic, political, cultural or educational disadvantage.

The wide-ranging protection provided by the Bill cannot be dismissed on the ground of alleged “appeasement of minorities”.   

The ‘Anti-Discrimination and Equality Bill, 2016’ envisages the creation of a Central Equality Commission to be headed by a Chief Equality Commissioner (CEC) who is a retired judge of the Supreme Court or chief justice of a high court or a senior advocate practicing in the Supreme Court. The CEC is to be assisted by two Equality Commissioners (ECs). One of them would be a distinguished academic and the other a member from civil society who has “worked for organisations committed in advancing the purpose of the Act”. At least one of the three ECs should be a woman.

The other nine ex-officio members of the Commission will be the chairpersons of the present national commissions for SCs, STs, minorities, human rights, women etc.
The functions of the Chief Equality Commission shall include:

• Eliminate discrimination, harassment, boycott, segregation, discriminatory violence and victimization.
• Encourage the formulation and adoption of good practice in relation to equality, anti-discrimination and diversity for the disadvantaged groups.
• Promote awareness and understanding of the rights and duties under this Act.
• Assist aggrieved persons in seeking legal remedies provided under this Act.
• Monitor the enforcement of this Act.
• Review, from time to time, the functioning of this Act and make recommendations for its improvement.

The powers of the Central Equality Commission:

• Approach any court for the enforcement of this Act.
• Require any public servant to undergo diversity training.
• Take any other reasonable action towards the implementation of this Act.
• Conduct equality impact assessments of the activities of composition of any public authority or any private person performing a public function.
• Direct a State Equality Commission (to be set up along similar lines as the central commission) to investigate any alleged breach of provisions of this Act.

The full text of the Bill may be read here.
 
 

The post Congress MP Shashi Tharoor now proposes what the UPA government never did: A Bill to end discrimination, promote equality appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Courtesy: MAHMUD HAMS/AFP/Getty Images

Egypt’s final round of parliamentary elections won’t end until next week (January 11) but the outcome is becoming clear. The Muslim Brotherhood will most likely win half the lower house of Parliament and more extreme Islamists will occupy a quarter. Secular parties will be left with just 25 per cent of the seats.

Islamism did not cause the Arab Spring. The region’s authoritarian governments had simply failed to deliver on their promises. Though Arab authoritarianism had a good run from the 1950s until the 1980s, economies eventually stagnated, debts mounted and growing, well-educated populations saw the prosperous egalitarian societies they had been promised receding over the horizon, aggrieving virtually everyone, secularists and Islamists alike.

The last few weeks however have confirmed that a revolution’s consequences need not follow from its causes. Rather than bringing secular revolutionaries to power, the Arab Spring is producing flowers of a decidedly Islamist hue. More unsettling to many, Islamists are winning fairly: religious parties are placing first in free, open elections in Tunisia, Morocco and Egypt. So why are so many Arabs voting for parties that seem politically regressive to westerners?

The West’s own history furnishes an answer. From 1820 to 1850 Europe resembled today’s Arab world in two ways. Both regions experienced historic and seemingly contagious rebellions that swept from country to country. And in both cases, frustrated people in many nations with relatively little in common rallied around a single ideology – one not of their own making but inherited from previous generations of radicals.

In 19th century Europe, that ideology was liberalism. It emerged in the late 18th century from the American, Dutch, Polish and especially French revolutions. Whereas the chief political divide in society had long been between monarchs and aristocrats, the revolutions drew a new line between the “old regime” of monarchy, nobility and church, and the new commercial classes and small landholders. For the latter group, it was the old regime that produced the predatory taxes, bankrupt treasuries, corruption, perpetual wars and other pathologies that dragged down their societies. The liberal solution was to extend rights and liberties beyond the aristocracy which had inherited them from the middle ages.

Suppressing liberalism became the chief aim of absolutist regimes in Austria, Russia and Prussia after they helped defeat France in 1815. Prince Klemens von Metternich, Austria’s powerful chancellor, claimed that “English principles” of liberty were foreign to the continent. But networks of liberals – Italian Carbonari, Freemasons, English Radicals – continued to operate underground, communicating across societies and providing a common language for dissent.

This helped lay the ideological groundwork for Spain’s liberal revolution in 1820. From there, revolts spread to Portugal, the Italian states of Naples and Piedmont, and Greece. News of the Spanish revolution even spurred the adoption of liberal Constitutions in the nascent states of Gran Colombia, Argentina, Uruguay, Peru and Mexico. Despite their varied grievances, in each case, liberalism served as a rallying point and political programme on which the malcontents could agree.

Liberalism in 19th century Europe and Islamism in the Arab world today are like channels dug by one generation of activists and kept open, sometimes quietly, by future ones

A decade later, in July 1830, a revolution toppled France’s conservative Bourbon monarchy. Insurrection spread to Belgium, Switzerland, a number of German and Italian states and Poland. Once again a variety of complaints were distilled into the rejection of the old regime and the acceptance of liberalism.

The revolutions of 1848 were more numerous and consequential but remarkably similar to the earlier ones. Rebels with little in common – factory workers in Paris, peasants in Ireland, artisans in Vienna – followed a script written in the 1790s that was rehearsed continuously in the ensuing years across the continent.

Today rural and urban Arabs with widely varying cultures and histories are showing that they share more than a deep frustration with despots and a demand for dignity. Most, whether moderate or radical, or living in a monarchy or a republic, share a common inherited language of dissent: Islamism.

Political Islam, especially the strict version practised by Salafists in Egypt, is thriving largely because it is tapping into ideological roots that were laid down long before the revolts began. Invented in the 1920s by the Muslim Brotherhood, kept alive by their many affiliates and offshoots, boosted by the failures of Nasserism and Baathism, allegedly bankrolled by Saudi and Qatari money and inspired by the defiant example of revolutionary Iran, Islamism has for years provided a coherent narrative about what ails Muslim societies and where the cure lies. Far from rendering Islamism unnecessary, as some experts forecast, the Arab Spring has increased its credibility; Islamists, after all, have long condemned these corrupt regimes as destined to fail.

Liberalism in 19th century Europe and Islamism in the Arab world today are like channels dug by one generation of activists and kept open, sometimes quietly, by future ones. When the storms of revolution arrive, whether in Europe or the Middle East, the waters will find those channels. Islamism is winning out because it is the deepest and widest channel into which today’s Arab discontent can flow.

This article was published in The New York Times on January 7, 2012. www.nytimes.com

The post Why Islamism is winning appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Like the Dandi Yatra marked a turning point in the freedom struggle, the events in the state were a turning point in the fight against non-secular forces.
— Narendra Modi, Gujarat CM, addressing a meeting at the Rashtriya Shala, Rajkot,
The Times of India, April 22, 2002.

It is all a conspiracy to tarnish Gujarat… It all started with a misinformation campaign when Surat was hit by a mysterious disease, termed as plague. Then came the (campaign about) the killings of Christians in Dangs… Not a single Christian was killed, or injured, but the campaign continued. After this came the Bhuj earthquake, when Gujarat was again shown in poor light… Now it’s the communal violence. All these are part of a strategy to discredit the state. No chief minister had opened relief camps during communal riots in the past… My government has arrested 31,000 people. How many were arrested during the Congress regimes?
— Modi, The Statesman, April 23, 2002.

The Congress was involved in the Godhra massacre and subsequent violence for gaining political mileage. They are trying to foment communal hatred by making inflammatory statements and ‘rubbing salt on the wounds of people’.
— Modi’s official release while addressing public meetings at Tharad, Palanpur, Bhiloda and Shera towns during his one-day tour of North and Central Gujarat,
Deccan Herald, April 27, 2002.

The Gujarat riots were a sign of Hindu valour and it was a divine force which had given Hindus courage to stand up to the attackers. For the first time in 1,000 years Hindus had givent their attackers a befitting reply. The valour shown in Gujarat will not end here. The VHP will take this message to the remotest corners of the country through its Ram jap programmes.
Ashok Singhal, Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader inaugurating an R.S.S. programme, The Deccan Herald, May 6, 2002

There are extremist elements living in the relief camps, I have asked the home minister Gordhan Zadaphiya to shift the Daria Khan Ghumbhat camp since my Hindu voters feel insecure with so many Muslims together there.
— Bharat Barot, Gujarat Food and Civil supplies Minister in The Times of India and Frontline, May 11-24, 2002.

Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf’s provocative address earlier this week has encouraged disruptive elements to burst a series of bombs in Ahmedabad city buses yesterday (a dozen persons were injured).
— Modi, UNI, May 30, 2002

The chief minister, Narendra Modi outrightly rejected the demand that riot-affected victims from the worst–affected areas like Naroda Patia, Chamanpura, Sardarpura, BEST Bakery, Panvad and other carnages be provided with alternate resettlement sites. He also refused any government funds to rebuild the ransacked shrines. The CM’s tough talk came at a gathering organised by the Gujarat Minorities Finance Development Corporation, chairman Gani Qureshi.
— News report in The Times of India, June 8, 2002

If Muslims continue to take the country towards partition, they would have to stay in relief camps like in Gujarat.
— Ashok Singhal, international working president, VHP, June 22, 2002, PTI.

Five months after presiding over a state–directed, statewide genocide in his state, chief minister Narendra Modi continues to rule Gujarat in abject defiance of judicial directives and Constitutional principles. Refugees or internally displaced persons within Ahmedabad city and all over the state have been forcibly evicted out of camps where they had sought shelter, despite the assurance given by government to the Gujarat High Court on June 4, that camps will not be coerced into closing without adequate rehabilitation. The court was hearing a public interest petition (PIL) filed by the Mumbai-based Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and Communalism Combat.

As a result, nearly 25,000 of the over 66,000 (official figure) people who had sought refuge within Ahmedabad city and a majority of the 21,000–odd (official figure) refugees from the rest of the state of Gujarat have been coerced into leaving the camps, their dignity compromised and with no guarantee of security. (CC’s independent investigation in March had shown that there were over 1,20,000 people living in the camps in Gujarat). In over 70 per cent of the cases, basic rehabilitation costs have also been denied, with cheques of meagre amounts being disbursed.

In fact, it was only after six relief camps (with the encouragement of the CJP and CC) filed a petition in the Gujarat High Court in mid-March, that over a dozen camps in Ahmedabad city were registered and its occupants started receiving adequate water, grain and medical facilities from the state.

Senior counsel Aspi Chinoy from Mumbai had made a spirited daylong argument before justice Pradip Majmudar, urging that basic amenities consistent with human dignity were a responsibility of a Constitution-governed state committed to the basic rights and dignity of every citizen. A joint commission comprising of advocates for the petitioners and the collectorate had then been appointed by the HC following which advocate for the petitioners Suhel Tirmizi, and the government pleader had carried out a detailed survey of city camps.

Despite these checks, in what is being seeing as a crude move by the Modi government to impose snap Assembly polls on a state that has far from recovered from three months of violence, the civil administration has been deployed to arm–twist the managers of camps run by minority institutions, to shut them down ‘voluntarily’.

Officially, there are now only 13, 482 refugees in the state (all of them in Ahmedabad city) to whom food grains are grudgingly being provided by the district collector, with only three–four days ration being dished out at a time. An additional 6,500 persons continue to live in other camps in Ahmedabad even today but they have ceased to exist in official records after being coerced into closing down between June 10–18. (CJP-CC survey for the PIL.) This, despite the pendency of the writ petition and the government assurance that there would be no closure of camps.

Over two dozen affidavits filed by the petitioners, 24 camp managers and refuge seekers for the hearing of the writ that came up before Justices Sinha and Panchal of the Gujarat High Court on June 26, show that blatantly aggressive methods (including threatening camp managers with detention under POTA) were used by the district collectors to shut down the camps in mid–June. (See box). With the petitions still pending before the court, the government continues to pretend the camps were closed down voluntarily.

In short, around 20,000 persons today remain in camps within Ahmedabad city (only 13,500 as per government figures) and another 2,000–odd persons are in camps located elsewhere in the state but which have ceased to exist for the government. These camps — Nandasan (419 persons), Dasaj (400 persons), Lunva (100 persons), Shivali (400), Gunja (near Visnagar-50 persons), Unjha (250 persons) and Lunavada (460 persons) — were summarily closed down between mid–May and early July and the government assumes no responsibility for the relief or rehabilitation needs of these people.

Gujarat’s principal secretary, revenue, CK Koshy told CC that there are 11 official camps with 13,482 inmates in Ahmedabad. Stating that he was open to examining the independent figures gathered by us about camps and its inmates from all over the state, he added that rehabilitation packages had already been disbursed in their entirety by the government.

The demonisation of Muslim survivors huddled in relief camps is an ugly reality of post–genocide Gujarat. Be it the CM or his senior ministers, vicious and highly publicised statements ("anti–national elements are suspected to be seeking shelter in relief camps") have only rubbed salt in the wounds of the traumatised victims of violence.

Modi had made repeated noises, wanting to wind up the camps even before Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee’s visit to Ahmedabad on April 4. The BJP state food and civil supplies minister, Bharat Barot had also made widely publicised statements about the ‘anti–national elements residing within camps’, urging the state minister for home, Gordhan Zadaphiya that they should be wound up.

After the violence occurred and was allowed to spread, the party in power and it’s spokespersons made their disregard for state responsibility within constitutional boundaries apparent. The existence of some democratic institutional safeguards availed of by the citizenry helped alleviate, the designs of the BJP–ruled government to some extent.

That legal interventions concerning relief camps were imperative is evident from what happened in Ahmedabad city on April 3. Soon after the Ahmedabad collector, Pandaya completed his visit to the Suleimani Roza Relief Camp located in curfew–bound Gomtipur in the presence of Mr Parmar of the Ahmedabad collectorate, the police targeted camp residents. Led by PI SD Sharma, the police set upon the 750 refugees of the Suleiman Roza Relief Camp (behind Nutan Mills), Saraspur and actually shot at two persons, Pirujbhai Mohammad Sheikh (30) and Khatoonbi Sharfuddin Saiyed (45).

The camp, which had been home to 750 displaced persons for over a month, was thus wound up in brutal fashion. The residents fled and many were forced to sleep under the open sky in fear and terror. The 35 Al Iqwan Chaali camp also received continuous threats and faced attacks from local mobs. Two other camps — the Char Toda relief camp at Gomtipur and the Al Iqwan Committee at Saraspur were threatened by the police in early April, asking them to shut down.

The PIL still pending before the Gujarat High Court argues that the basic rights to a life with security and dignity, and free from dire need are a responsibility of the State. And, that, apart from the ex–gratia payment offered to those killed during the communal riots, no comprehensive rehabilitation plan was offered by the Gujarat government; nor were steps taken in this direction made public. Fair and non–discriminatory relief and rehabilitation are a must to restore people’s faith in the government and the administration, the petitioners have argued.

The same state that was quick to declare a sizable rehabilitation package for the survivors of the January 2001 earthquake has been silent following the genocide. The earthquake package had included an ex–gratia amount to the next–of–kin of those killed, compensation for loss of housing and property, dole money to meet the routine expenses of the earthquake affected and rehabilitation. This time it is different.

The petitioners have also demanded a comprehensive survey by an independent and autonomous committee to assess the extent of damage caused to life and property to enable the drawing of a reasonable rehabilitation plan. The absence of a proper plan for the rehabilitation and re–location of refugees within Gujarat, the proclaimed ‘laboratory for Hindutva’, has only compounded the pain and insecurity of tens of thousands of refugees who, reeling under the trauma of brutal massacres and violence, had to stay huddled together for three–four months in camps run by their community leaders all over the state.

In most cases where Muslims have returned to their villages, they are faced with economic and social boycott for having had the audacity to name the perpetrators of violence in their complaints to the police. In other villages of Gujarat, a land once associated with Mahatma Gandhi, the village leaders address Muslims wanting to return in derogatory terms and tell them bluntly: "Baandyaon nathi joyita" ("We do not want any Muslims here").

A statewide survey undertaken by Communalism Combat on the status of refugees, reveals a dismal picture (see accompanying story). The options before Gujarat’s Muslims are clear and harsh: servility, boycott or exodus.

While in many cases, in the villages and towns of Gujarat, the collector and mamlatdar (civil servants) have attempted the return of refugees with dignity of their own accord, the hate campaign of the RSS/BJP/VHP and BD has undermined their constitutional writ and allowed the denial of basic rights to continue. Though attempts were made in many cases for dignified rehabilitation, threats and warning to withdraw criminal complaints and FIRs have won the day.

Three months ago, as per the government’s own admission, there were over 66,000 refugees in camps in Ahmedabad and another 21,000 elsewhere in the state. Hence, in a matter of two–and–a–half months, as per official figures, 52,500 persons from Ahmedabad city and another 21,000 from elsewhere (73,500 in all) have left the relief camps without any systematic survey on their rehabilitation. At least half the number from within Ahmedabad and a significant majority of those from the rest of the state have been coerced into leaving with no state guarantee or responsibility for their security or future.

Even the measly amount of Rs 2,500 (increased from the Rs 1500 announced earlier) for ghar vakhari — purchase of utensils for restarting a home — has not been paid in 70 per cent of the cases. The compensation amount of Rs 40,000 for destroyed houses announced by the Prime Minister at the Shah–e–Alam camp on April 4 has reached only a small percentage of those eligible.

In what is nothing short of a cruel mockery of the idea of the State’s obligation towards rehabilitation, the victims of Naroda Patiya — where one of the worst massacres took place — have received cheques ranging from Rs 500–1,500. The same is true in most other cases.

Modi has doggedly refused to commit himself to any demand for the purchase of land and re-building of homes. The CC’s statewide survey shows that the vast majority of homes have been rebuilt by NGOs. Some 90 per cent of these have been at the initiative of Muslim organisations – Jamiat–e–Ulema–e–Hind, Jamaat–e–Islami, United Economic Forum and Afmi Charitable Trust, Baroda. The Asha Kiran Trust, Jansangharsh Manch and SPRAT, are among the non–Muslim organisations to have contributed the rest.

Given the abject failure and refusal of the state and central governments to resettle the survivors through reasonable and speedy rehabilitation, the onus has fallen, almost entirely, on the Muslim community to look after their co–religionists. A sad commentary on the social and political reality in India today.

Meanwhile, the Gujarat police was consistent in its indiscriminate targeting of Muslims even through April and May. Violence broke out once more in Ahmedabad and it’s outskirts on April 3, with the police, RAF and SRP forces numbering around 150, shooting 29 innocent victims and killing one. Advocate Nizam was shot dead by the police inside his home. The same day, on the eve of the PM’s visit, Dr Ishaq Sheikh, vice–president of the Al Ameen Garib Niwas Hospital, Ahmedabad — an institution that had been at the forefront in helping the injured and brutalised over the past month or so — was pulled out of his ambulance by the Ahmedabad police, SRP and RAF personnel and brutally beaten up.

Police inspectors Modi and Parmar who were present while this happened did nothing to stop the assault. The second person shot dead in police firing, Mohammad Yunus Akbarbhai, hailed from Sakhar Ghanchi ki Chawl. The policemen named by eyewitnesses are NA Modi (PSI D Staff), NR Jadhav, senior police inspector and Mr. Sawani, DCP.

On April 21, after a constable was killed at Dani Limda, the police went on the rampage and shot dead six persons in brazen ‘reprisal killings.’ Hanifabibi Bashir Ahmed Shaikh (42), living at Modi Chawl, Kalubhai Shaikh (20), living at Jhoolta Minara, Naziabibi and Mehmood Hussein Shaikh (daughter and father) aged 13 and 42 respectively, residents of Patel Chowk, Kamdar Maidan, Abrar Ahmed Hanif Qureshi (22) also living at Patel Chowki and Mehmoobbhai Sultanbhai Shaikh(22) living at Maniarwada, Gomtipur, fell victim to police violence and bullets.

In Baroda on May 1, policemen brutally beat a nine–month pregnant woman. A week later, when the Concerned Citizens Tribunal recorded the testimony, her mother said that she had delivered her baby post-trauma but she could only breast feed her baby from one breast as from the other, oozed blood, not milk.

Selective and large–scale arrests of members of the minority community have continued in Ahmedabad, Baroda, Godhra and elsewhere. In Godhra and other places, despite the passage of three months, young men have not been released. In the Gulberg society Chamanpura massacre, 21 arrests have been made while three accused roam scot-free.

In the Sardarpur massacre at Mehsana in which 34 persons were brutally killed, the additional sessions judge, Mehsana, DR Shah, released all the 46 accused when even the primary investigations were not complete. Interestingly, the public prosecutor in the case is Dilip Trivedi, general secretary of the VHP, Mehsana district, who was responsible for publishing an extremely provocative statement in the widely circulated Gujarati daily, Sandesh, on February 28. (See legal initiatives section.) Many other legal initiatives being undertaken in the state face stumbling blocks because public prosecutors, displaying a blatantly partisan attitude, simply do not do justice to the cases in hand.

In some cases, after the initial paralysis and complicity, policemen have attempted speedier and fair investigations (See legal initiatives.) However, sections of the prosecutors who are partisan appointments by the government and a conveniently non-interfering judiciary have allowed injustice to continue.

That, fortunately, some institutions still work, even in Hindutva-driven Gujarat, is apparent from the forensic investigation into the Godhra tragedy, which resulted in the first chargesheet being filed by the police. This investigation by the Ahmedabad–based Forensic Science Laboratory, contradicts the view held so far that the attackers had thrown the inflammable liquid at the train from a distance. Specifically, it explodes the carefully–touted theory by CM Modi and even hinted at in early March by then Union home minister, Lal Krishna Advani, that the Godhra tragedy was the result of Machiavellian pre–planning.

In the cities and villages of Gujarat convulsed by the violence that spread across 16 of the state’s 24 districts, the aftermath for the minority community is laden with tension and the cold realisation of a new phase and stage of existence. Forced to go back to their villages or to re–locate where the former option is simply unavailable, Muslims in Gujarat face a bitter reality.

In mid–April, they were convinced or compelled to cancel the Muharram tazia procession. But when it came to the Lord Jagannath rathyatra, despite police advice to the contrary, Modi insisted it must follow the traditional route that winds its way through Muslim areas and mixed localities. On July 12, it was the Muslims who were asked by the Ahmedabad police to maintain ‘junta curfew’ (self-imposed curfew). On the eve of the procession, it was the homes of Muslims en route in Jamalpur that were searched and re–searched. And it was Muslims who fled their homes for a few days to return only after the rathyatra was over.

In Ahmedabad and in Baroda, a silent yet effective boycott of Muslims, socially and economically, continues. A few icons from the Gujarati business community have tried to counter the hate politics led or encouraged by the Gujarat government. (See Good News section). But schools in Ahmedabad and Baroda have now, more so than before (See CC, ‘Face to Face with Fascism’, April 2000), bid good–bye to Muslim students.

For the state, Gujaratis and the rest of India, post–genocide Gujarat presents a grimmer challenge than before. Constitutional breakdown has been evident there since 1998 when the BJP assumed power in the state. The period between end–February and May provided grim evidence of what the ideology of supremacy and hatred can achieve when it comes unto its own; post–May, Gujarat has settled into a state that lives outside the Indian Constitution; normalcy for ‘us’, trauma for ‘them’.

In his book, We, Or Our Nationhood Defined, which many consider to be the ‘Bible of Hindutva’, the revered ideologue and sarsanghchalak of RSS, Madhav Sadashiv Golwalkar (‘Guru Golwalkar’) wrote in the mid–30s:

"The foreign races in Hindusthan (Muslims and Christians – ed) must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no idea but those of the glorification of the Hindu race and culture, ie, of the Hindu nation and must lose their separate existence to merge in the Hindu race, or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu Nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment — not even citizen’s rights. There is, at least, should be, no other course for them to adopt. We are an old nation; let us deal, as old nations ought to and do deal, with the foreign races, who have chosen to live in our country."

Were he to be alive, Guruji would proudly proclaim today’s Gujarat as the ‘Hindu Rashtra’ of his dreams.

Yet, the institutions of Indian democracy and those who man them seem oblivious to or complacent about the ominous implications of Gujarat for the rest of India. What more will it take to shake them out of their complacency?

(With field reports from Rais Khan.)

Archived from Communalism Combat, July 2002 Year 8  No. 79, Cover Story 1

The post Godse’s Gujarat appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Islamic Relief Committee and the Federation of Civil Liberties are two Muslim associations that have lead or
sponsored certain initiatives.

The Jansangharsh Manch, a secular group from Ahmedabad, is also leading some of the cases related to compensation and police atrocities in Gomtipur.

The Citizens for Justice and Peace and CC are handling some criminal cases like the Gulberg-Chamanpura massacres, besides appearing before the Modi government–appointed KG Shah Commission of Inquiry. (Subsequently, Justice DH Nanavati has been appointed co-commissioner). They have also filed writs both in the Gujarat High Court and the Supreme Court.

The People’s Union for Civil Liberties, Baroda and Citizens Initiative, Ahmedabad, have also carried out some legal surveys and assisted with filing affidavits before the Shah-Nanavati Commission. Majlis, Mumbai, India Centre for Human Rights and Law and Lawyers Collective are some of the other organisations that helped individuals file affidavits before the Commission.

Cases before Supreme Court

In April, Mallika Sarabhai and other concerned citizens from Ahmedabad filed a petition challenging the appointment of the Shah-Nanavati Commission and urged that the NHRC be given full powers like a commission to investigate the Gujarat happenings.

Another writ petition filed by many prominent activists and citizens from Ahmedabad and Mumbai urged court directive to hand over major investigations in Gujarat — Godhra, Gulberg Society, Naroda Pattiya, Sardarpur, Visnagar, Kediad, BEST Bakery, Odh etc — to the CBI since the conduct of the Gujarat police has been questioned even by the NHRC. This petition was drafted by advocate Mihir Desai. Both petitions pending admission which have been clubbed together by the Supreme Court and are to come up for hearing in end–July.

In early April, senior advocate Girishbhai Patel appeared in a public interest writ petition urging a fresh date for board examinations given the dislocation caused by violence filed on behalf of scores of students. The Gujarat HC refused to entertain the PIL which was then taken up by India Centre for Human Rights and Law (advocate Colin Gonsalves) in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court directed the government to set a new date for the examinations.

Cases before Gujarat HC

In the Gujarat High Court, senior advocate Nirupam Nanavati appeared with Suhel Tirmizi in the relief camp petition. Suhel Tirmizi is also actively involved in the recording of affidavits for filing before the Shah–Nanavati Commission. Senior advocate Mihir Desai, who has also taken an active interest in legal aid work post–genocide Gujarat, settled the draft of the petition.

In all, over 3,100 affidavits have been filed here by individual complainants before Commission.

Sardarpura massacre, Mehsana

Thirty–four persons, mostly women and children, were burnt alive in a small room in Sardarpur village. In all, there are 46 accused and they have been released on bail through four different applications filed before the additional sessions judge, Mehsana, D. R. Shah. Four applications have been filed for cancellation of bail of the accused by advocate Hashim Qureshi appearing for the victims’ families.

The public prosecutor in the district court, Dilip Trivedi, is also a general secretary of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Mehsana district. (He gave an extremely provocative statement on February 28 to the Sandesh daily).

The four applications for rejection of bail are on the grounds that even after being released on bail, the accused attacked a mosque in the same Sardarpur area. (FIR no. 110/2002 dated May 13 is launched with the Vijapur police station.). The PP did not take any objection to cancellation of bail. The High Court has issued notices in all these four matters filed under section 439(2) of CrPC. Chargesheets have been filed.

Deepla Darwaja, Visnagar, Mehsana district

Twenty–four persons were attacked and subsequently burnt to death. Thereafter, with a view to destroy the evidence, the culprits collected their remains and dumped it in a lake situated in a Patel community area.

Two cancellation of bail applications have been filed by advocate Hashim Qureshi against the 43 accused released on bail. Shockingly, the same PP (Mr. Trivedi) who never objects to bail applications by the VHP and the BJP had in this case, registered his ‘no objection’ to bail being given to the accused.

These applications have made several pleas, the main ones being that the police conduct in non–registration of names of accused, deliberate non–recording of panchnama and subsequent failure to help locate the victims’ bodies all ensured that easy bail was obtained. Prima facie there appears to be biased police conduct, a patent example of culpable negligence. Therefore, a special criminal application has also been made challenging the same.

Gomtipur police atrocities case, Ahmedabad

This case pertains to the death of six persons in reprisal killings by the police on April 21, after a police constable was killed at Dani Limda. Significantly, there were no disturbances in the area on that day, no members of the majority community reside anywhere around where the victims were targeted or shot dead.

Hanifabibi Bashir Ahmed Sheikh (42) a woman residing at Modi Chawl: She was killed because police constable Prakash hit her on the head. The VS Hospital post–mortem report shows cause of death as shock as a result of firearm injury. There is no FIR registered. No compensation has been given to date.

Kalubhai Sheikh (20), male, residing at Jhoolta Minara, Ahmedi Society: Just in front of the society, the police fired from the police chowki. He suffered a head injury and died on the spot. The post-mortem report from VS Hospital identified the cause of death as due to shock as a result of firearm injury.

Naziabibi and Mehmood Husein Sheikh (daughter and father) aged 18 and 42 respectively residing at Patel Chawl, Kamdar Medan: While cooking in her kitchen, Naziabi was hit by a police bullet, and she died on the spot due to head injury. Her post-mortem was done at the VS Hospital. Her father, Mehboob Hussein Sheikh was shot at in the same incident, outside the house.

Abrar Ahmed Hanif Qureshi (22),male, residing at Patel Chawl, Kamdar Medan: Though the main gate of the chawl was closed, police aimed from a hole in the gate. Neck injury, died on the spot. Post-mortem at VS Hospital.

Mehboob bhai Sultan bhai Sheikh, (22), male, residing at Maniarwada, Gomtipur: The police entered the chawl from a private house. Deceased was on the roof of his house when one police constable along with several police personnel beat him mercilessly. Then the constable, using a private firearm concealed in his socks, shot him from point blank range.

Four different applications have been filed before the Gujarat High Court on behalf of the victims and supported by the Islamic Relief Committee, praying for the special investigation by the crime branch and inquiry against the culprits/police constables and for compensation.

The grounds: The police authority totally failed in discharging their duty as per the provisions of the Police Manual, particularly Clause 45, 53, 55, 60 and 61 of part 3 of Volume 2. Therefore, this is a fit case for inquiry through proper channels, by proper office, as per the hierarchy of the police department.

In a case of Darmishta behn, the Gujarat High Court has led down the law on payment of compensation. The court ruled that when great loss and injustice is caused to a person who has loss his beloved, and his life has become miserable by way of an atrocity by the police officer, then he is not in position to meet with any orthodox litigation and proceeding. Therefore, interim compensation can be awarded under Article 226.

Dr Bhavnagari Case, Ahmedabad

On February 28, when many areas of Ahmedabad and the state of Gujarat were being attacked, a large mob of 5-7,000 had targeted the Paldi area of Ahmedabad where. Dr Bhavnagari, a respected doctor and his son lived in the Delite Apartments.

Dr Bhavnagari owns a licensed gun and is also an ace shooter, being a member of the National Rifle Shooters’ Association. When the mob advanced close and threatened the doctor and his family, he used his gun and fired. Two persons were injured and later one fell victim to the bullets.

The police arrested Dr Bhavnagari despite there being a strong case under section 66 onwards of the Indian Penal Code that permits a person firing in self–defence when his life is endangered. The police also filed an FIR against both the Dr Bhavnagari and his son on the ground that both had fired. The son surrendered to the police in late March.

Though the police had met one of the survivors of the bullets on March 3, they recorded his statement only on March 14. In his statement, the young man had stated that both father and son had fired in which two persons died. Applications for anticipatory bail filed for both father and son by advocate Haroon Momin were rejected in the City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad. The bail applications were then pending before the Gujarat High Court.

In its report, filed under section 159, CRPC on June 24/26 before the Sessions Court, the police stated: "If he had not fired, he could have died. A mob of 1,500–2,000 had attacked the building; shops were burning, they had deadly weapons and it was only when sections of this mob climbed the staircase of Delite Apartments that Dr Bhavnagari and his son fired."

When this report was filed in the Sessions Court, Chetan Shah, advocate for the VHP (he is appearing in all their cases) asked to be joined as party. Magistrate Purani turned down the application saying that he had no locus standi. The matter for deliberation on the police report under section 159 was pending.

Meanwhile, 90 days had passed since Dr Bhavnagari’s arrest. Under section 167(2) of the CrPC if no chargesheet has been filed within three months, a person has to be released. Both appeals for bail came up before the HC. Granting bail, the judge, Justice Behram J Sethna passed unwarranted strictures against two police officers — additional commissioner of police Satish Sharma and PI NH Joshi – for filing it’s report under section 159.

He says, "Therefore prima facie I am of the considered opinion that by submitting the aforesaid report, both of them have committed contempt of court for which even contempt proceedings could have been initiated against them; however on the request made by learned additional public prosecutor, Abhichandani and on the assurance given by PI Joshi that that in future this will not be repeated I have not thought it fit to initiate such proceedings. However I am fully convinced that the attempt made by both the police officers Shri Satish Sharma, additional CP Sector I and PI NH Joshi in ‘trying to interfere with the administration of justice by submitting the report dated June 24, 02 and June 26, 02 is a serious misconduct for which both the police officers should be dealt with strictly by way of departmental proceedings by the state govt. When the last day for filing chargesheet was June 30, 02 they submitted such report at the last minute and allowed the main accused to get the bail."

Archived from Communalism Combat, July 2002 Year 8  No. 79, Cover Story 4

The post Punish the guilty appeared first on SabrangIndia.

June 16, 2002
Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee
Prime Minister of India
New Delhi.

Dear Prime Minister
Having visited Gujarat and being in touch with the distressing situation there, I intend to contribute a sum of Rs. 1 crore from my allocation under "Member of Parliament Local Area Development Scheme" (MPLADS) for relief and rehabilitation of the victims of the recent communal violence in that state. I may be permitted to do so.

Under MPLADS every MP is entitled to an allocation of Rs. 2 crore per year for development works in his constituency or state. However, the Rules were relaxed to permit allocation by MPs under MPLADS for the victims of the Gujarat earthquake last year and of the Orissa cyclone in the year before. Similar relaxation may now be permitted for the benefit of the victims of the recent Gujarat holocaust.

If the rules are relaxed most MPs would like to utilise a substantial part of their allocation under MPLADS for this noble purpose. A contribution by a large number of Parliamentarians will motivate the people of the country to also contribute for this worthy cause.

I also urge you to kindly issue an appeal to all our countrymen to donate generously for this cause on the same lines of the appeals issued by you at the time of the Gujarat earthquake and the Orissa cyclone.

The above becomes necessary since the state government has not yet taken effective steps in this matter. The recommendations of the National Human Rights Commission including those relating to relief and rehabilitation are not being implemented effectively.

May I, therefore, request you to direct the state government to take the following measures urgently:

i) The compensation for the damaged/burnt/destroyed houses should be paid as per the norms adopted for the earthquake victims;

ii) The compensation for Ghat Vakhri (compensation for burnt/looted household articles) should be a minimum of Rs.20,000.

iii) Immediate allotment of house sites to enable the victims to relocate themselves with honour and dignity.

iv) Involving housing finance institutions like HUDCO, NHB, CANFIN Homes, LIC etc. to advance loans liberally with minimum paperwork and at nominal interest rates. The repayment period should be spread over a period of 20 years and it should begin after three years from the date of construction of the house.

With personal regards,

EDUARDO FALEIRO

MP, Rajya Sabha

Editors: As we go to press, Faleiro who has just returned from a tour to Turkey, told CC that all that he has so far got from the PMO in response to his letter is a formal acknowledgement. Meanwhile, a number of party leaders and MPs whom CC spoke to supported Faleiro’s initiative, especially in view of the fact that neither the governments in New Delhi and Gujarat, nor India Inc. have been particularly forthcoming in providing succour to the survivors of the genocide in Gujarat. Many felt that a substantial contribution from parliamentarians, would provide the badly needed emotional balm, apart from relief and rehabilitation in physical terms.

"It’s a very good idea and we should all support it," said the independent Rajya Sabha MP, Kuldip Nayar, adding that such a step would be a most welcome departure in parliament history. The problem in Gujarat is so colossal that what the government has done so far is a mere drop in the ocean, he said. "I am sure a lot of MPs will like to contribute to this effort once a decision is taken in this regard," he added. Stating that not all MPs might be willing to contribute Rs 1 crore out of the funds at their disposal, even Rs. 10 lakh per MP (5 per cent of the funds at their disposal), the contribution from 850 MPs from the two houses could add up to a substantial Rs. 85 crore.

"The BJP will not be enthusiastic about such and idea. It could work only if party leaders take it up seriously with the government," said an MP from the Samajwadi Party, adding that he would gladly push the case within his own party if the Congress top brass took a lead in the matter.

"It is definitely a good idea and we will certainly pursue the matter," Sitaram Yechuri, CPI(M) politburo member told CC when contacted for his response.

Meanwhile, not content with a mere acknowledgement of his earlier letter to the PM, Faleiro intends to follow up his earlier letter with a fresh missive arguing that his suggestion should be acted upon especially considering that a substantial amount of the MPLADS funds remains unutilised by many MPs.

Archived from Communalism Combat, July 2002 Year 8  No. 79, Cover Story 5

The post Open letter to PM appeared first on SabrangIndia.

I hope the organisers of the CII Gujarat Annual Day function will excuse me for apparently ex-ceeding my brief by directly ad-dressing the causes and consequences of the current civil disturbances in Gujarat. However, I propose to break with our customary practice of being politically correct in the belief that I am still being faithful to the CII’s outlook to business life which is modern, liberal, tolerant and caring of people.

Business As Usual – Soon?

"The business of business is business", said Milton Friedman, the celebrated American free market economist. Most businessmen all over the world would, at first thought, agree with him. So why are we, a collection of businessmen, meeting today to discuss among other things, such distinctly "non–business" themes such as Secularism?

The answer lies partly in the implied other half of Friedman’s statement, that: "the business of government is government."

So, if government governs well, business should be free to concentrate on business.

Another great American thinker, Peter Drucker said while referring to the huge role that business plays in a healthy society. "It is the social responsibility of business to make a profit." Meaning, thereby, that businesses must remain profitable, if they are to continue to employ people, create wealth and enrich societies in the many ways that they do.

But what happens, when governments don’t govern? Or, they mis–govern?

They can misgovern by errors of commission; for example, by persecuting a section of their citizens, as is happening in Zimbabwe or Iraq; or by errors of omission, by failing to govern, by failing to maintain law and order, and by failing to provide to citizens their fundamental rights to life and to work.

And when there is such a failure of government leading to disruption in civil life; the striking of terror among labourers, shopkeepers, teachers, judges; the closure of markets; an exodus of people who are consumers of the products we make and services we offer — then is it sensible, indeed is it even ethical, for business to say: "our business is only business…" and then to bury their heads in the sand and debris of the rubble created by almost four weeks of unlawful and barbaric behaviour? Because, when labour flees and markets close and consumers stop buying, what future do our businesses have?

In my view, we have no alternative — if we are concerned for the future well–being of industry and trade in Gujarat — to pause for a moment’s reflection on the causes and consequences of the events of the last four weeks.

It will be a sad mistake, I believe, for us to indulge in wishful thinking that riots and civil commotion are just a part of our life, they come and go like the occasional hurricane off the coast of Florida, that the damage will be repaired, (courtesy government grants and Insurance claims), and soon we’ll be back to "business as usual." Because, what we are experiencing in Gujarat are not mere riots; nor will all the damage be repaired; nor will business bounce back. Gujarat has been wounded deeply this time, it is still bleeding, and as we shall see, the seeds are being sown for still worse to come.

Who does Gujarat belong to?

Your famous poet and social historian Narmadashankar Lalshankar (who died in 1886) is remembered for his great poem "Jay Jay Garvi Gujarat", in which he celebrated all those cultural icons which provided a sense of identity to all who lived in Gujarat. In asking "who does Gujarat belong to?" he listed all the castes, communities, religions, sects; then says, not just these, because Gujarat does not belong to any particular group; he continues, that Gujarat belongs to all those who speak Gujarati; and then, not satisfied, goes on to say that Gujarat also belongs to non–Hindus, the Parsis, Muslims and the non– ‘savarna’ communities. Narmad believed passionately that, around such a cultural imagination — truly secular in spirit — a sense of belonging could be forged for the Gujarati people.

Narmad followed a great Jain tradition of compassion and tolerance; and Gandhi followed Narmad, converting a whole nation to espouse the idea of ‘ahimsa’. So what has brought this great tradition, in this great state, to a point where a recent documentary title sums up the present situation: "Genocide in the land of Gandhi?"

It may be best, though distasteful, to confront certain facts directly. The more openly we speak about these, the more likely we are to be able to deal with them:

• The horrific incident at Godhra was a crime against humanity and it is to be utterly condemned. Its culprits need to be found, tried and dealt with in the most severe way that our laws provide, including if necessary with the death penalty. In the words of Professor Bandukwala, "Whoever committed that crime was surely one of the worst enemies of the Muslims."
• The civil disorder in Ahmedabad, as it escalated into a combination of looting, arson and attacks on people, quickly revealed one clear pattern: that the maximum number of atrocities were committed against Muslims and Dalits.
• The vernacular press in Gujarat played a highly regrettable role in the run up to, and during, the disturbances. Many Muslim establishments bearing non-Muslim names, were specifically listed by these papers; and all of these were subsequently torched to cinders:
• An amazing de–humanisation could be seen in the behaviour of those on the streets. Most were young in age — in their twenties or less. To hear 12 and 15–year–old boys screaming for rape and murder, reflects a brutalisation that is difficult to comprehend in a land that was the breeding ground of ‘ahimsa’. A new and disturbing trend is now to hear women also expressing themselves in support of brutal retribution.
• As the genocide spread from Ahmedabad to other cities and the countryside, a systematic attempt could be seen to target and destroy the economic base of the Muslim community.

A Riot… or Genocide?

Let us reflect on two dimensions of this tragedy. First, the specific targeting of the Muslim sectors of employment and commerce does not hurt Muslims alone. It requires no great intelligence to understand that they are a part of the larger economic chain in the Gujarat economy. So attacking Muslim traders, shops, establishments, factories — deals a blow to the economy of Gujarat, and hurts the larger community as well.

Second, the notion that a ‘kriya’ (action) gives rise naturally to a ‘pratikriya’ (reaction) needs to be firmly dismissed as being both fallacious and dangerous. We’ve heard this time and again in the history of mankind, as a justification for violent and aggressive behaviour. Again, to hear this from a leader in the land of Mahatma Gandhi leads one to wonder how a non–violent doctrine which once united the whole of India, has degenerated so rapidly into an alibi for not being able to — or not being willing to — maintain law and order.

Likewise, leaders of the Shiv Sena in Bombay, when threatened with a suit for damages by the owners of a fine private hospital in Thane that was recently set on fire by Sena activists, (because their leader died in that hospital after sustaining injuries in a car crash) pleaded that the rioters be excused, because they were "naturally" emotionally upset by the death of their leader.

If it was your charitable trust that had set up and was running this fine hospital and now it had to be shut down because it was destroyed beyond repairs, how valid would you find this argument?

Consider the arithmetic of the situation:

• Fifty–six ‘kar sevaks’ are killed (let it be repeated) in an utterly condemnable atrocity.
• As a ‘natural’ reaction, somewhere between 600 innocents, that too in another city, are killed; and then hundreds more are burnt or butchered in the other towns and villages in Gujarat.
• So, if the government does nothing to swiftly punish the perpetrators of Godhra, Ahmedabad and the killings elsewhere, they, and we the public that elects our governments, have accepted (or condoned) the principle that, 18 innocent lives are fair retribution for each kar–sevak killed.
• What if this chain of reasoning is carried one step further? For the thousand people now dead, would it be a "natural" emotional counter–reaction, in the ratio of 18:1, for 18,000 more innocents to be slaughtered? You cannot fault the logic, or the arithmetic?
• Therefore, the citizens of this state — and particularly we businessmen — must do everything we can to refute this utterly dangerous proposition, that an act of violence can lead naturally to a counter–action of violence. It is nothing but a self–serving political argument, which if given greater currency, will surely wreak terrible damage on the economy of Gujarat and of India.

Who Loses?

Earlier, I had said that we can no longer contemplate the recent events as a passing storm and expect that soon it should be business as usual.

In today’s economy, it can no longer be so.

• Workers can vote with their feet. Much good labour may desert the State, adding to poverty and unemployment in Gujarat and other states.
• The poorest, daily–rated worker always suffers the most in a riot. There are more Hindu daily rated workers than Muslims in most of our cities, so the majority community — at the lowest level of subsistence — is also dealt an economic blow.
• For every one person killed in riots, a dozen more may lose their breadwinner and hundreds more become homeless. What do we gain by impoverishing our consumers?
• Economies need stability and confidence in their future to attract investment. The flight of capital from this State cannot be counted at this moment; but in a while, it will be evident. It is safe to predict that hundreds of crores of investment will be turned away over the next few years, if normalcy doesn’t return NOW. Is this a price that the citizens of this State should pay in the long run, so that a few leaders may have the temporary satisfaction of "teaching some people a lesson."
• Finally, (staying only with the economic arguments) Indian business and industry, for ten years, have never lost an opportunity to berate the government at the Centre for not doing enough to help Indian industry become globally competitive. Yet, what happened in Gujarat, without industry (except for CII) raising its voice, will directly result in Gujarat becoming less competitive in future.

Its access to a good workforce, experienced managers and Indian and foreign investment is already being undermined. We know that already British Gas (due to invest $500 m in the State) the foreign strategic partners of Maroli Port, McDonalds, Samsung, LG, and a host of others are openly discussing a review of their investments in Gujarat.

Are We A Secular State?

Thanks to much confusion in the way we use English, we seem to have lost our understanding over the last 50 years of the correct meaning of the word ‘secular’. (It is interesting that there is no equivalent word for ‘secular’ in Indian languages!) The English word has always been used in contra–distinction to the word ‘religious’. While a purist definition would actually imply ‘anti–religious’, the generally accepted meaning the world over, is that a secular state is one where the State remains indifferent to, and neutral between, the religious beliefs and practices of its citizens. In short, the separation of Religion from the State.

The Constituent Assembly debates on the subject were heated, with many attempts to propose the concept of equal support for all religions, an idea contained in the phrase ‘sarva dharma samabhava’ — a phrase now so misused and confounding in its practical application, that it ought to be given a holiday. This should stop our political leaders from rushing around the country, at your and my expense, worshipping at shrines of whichever religions are politically expedient for them.

Dr. Rasheeduddin Khan, former Director of the Indian Institute of Federal Studies, has often being quoted on his well-accepted definition of secularism:

"… the secular character of the State is exhibited when it remains distant from, and distinct from, religion–dominated politics. In pursuit of State activities, it should show a respectful indifference to religion and keep a vigilant distance from political communalism.

"… the State in India is not a federation of religions; nor an aggregation of religious communities. It is an association of citizens – free and equal – irrespective of caste, colour, sex, language, region or status. A modern State is based on a Constitution… therefore a secular State should act as a secular State, no less and no more."

In short, a society is secular when any individual can go about his business confident that no one will harm him on the basis of his religion. Religion belongs to the home, the family, the temple or church or mosque — but not in public life.

Why have we found it so difficult to operate secular forms of governance in India? Let us state some more unpalatable truths.

Pre–modern India was very communal. If it was a Hindu State, there was no equality before the law, no equality of citizenship. It depended on your caste; even punishment depended on your caste. If it was a Muslim State, all others were second–class citizens. It is only in modern India that some concept of equality before the law is surfacing.

Yet, in the 1970s, Indira Gandhi brazenly undermined this spirit by building her vote–bank of Kshatriyas, Harijans, Adivasis and Muslims, known as KHAM. Even now, when a major political leader in Bihar aggressively attempts to unite Yadavs and Muslims, we don’t bat an eyelid. With over 35% of Gujarat’s population consisting of Patels, Banias and Brahmins, is it surprising that caste politics is still in full play?

If we are failing as a secular State, it is because equality before the law is not being practised. Unless we try to remove caste and religion from public life, secularism is going to be very difficult to uphold.

Can We Teach Minorities A Lesson?

Consider another set of numbers.

The population of Muslims in India is approximately 120 million. If they were a nation on their own, with a population of that size they would be ranked the 9th largest nation in the world! Does it make sense to threaten a war against such a large community in our midst, with slogans such as "go to Pakistan – or the Kabrastan?"

The moment people begin to believe such slogans, seeds of deep insecurity will be sown in a vast population dispersed across every part of our country, cities and villages. Should such a community turn hostile, then in today’s world of advanced weaponry and suicide bombers, it is not difficult to envisage the majority community being subject to immense threat and risk, that may endure for generations.

Omkar Goswami, CII’s chief economist, in a recent article, quoted a few lines from a poem (‘Remorse for Intemperate Speech’) by YB Yeats:

"Out of Ireland we have come.

Great hatred, little room

Maimed us at the start

I carry in my mother’s womb

A fanatic heart."

The Sangh Parivar may derive satisfaction from pulling Muslim minorities down a peg or two; but the appalling consequences of their actions will be to breed a whole new generation of terrorists both in their own fold and among the communities of Muslim and Dalit victims. Imagine an "intifada" type situation permeating the cities of India, where will the Hindus then turn? Especially when all the international goodwill we have recently built up will vanish and we shall be regarded as not different from our neighbours across our northwestern borders.

Is it not, therefore, our duty as educated, secular and modern thinking Indians, to roundly condemn their hateful and suicidal slogans? Should we not be putting every pressure on government to clamp down sharply on the distribution of pamphlets spreading virulent nonsense about minorities?

Minority Rights… or Human Rights?

One lesson of history is worth remembering: that a society that turns against other minorities, soon ends up by turning on its own. Consider, too, that our nation is replete with minorities — not just Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis and others; but most strikingly, Hindus have the largest minorities of all! Indeed, who or what is the Hindu majority? What happened to Brahmin superiority in Tamil Nadu? What’s happening to upper castes as the lower castes form coalitions? Is the numerical superiority of Dalits in several states fully appreciated? Adivasis are now organising and striking back. Indeed going back a little in time, have we forgotten that over half the Mughal elite that ran the Mughal administration were Rajputs?

The issue for all of us in CII is not to sweep these embarrassing caste – political issues under the carpet; but to take a clear stand with governments that we do not believe in an India segmented by caste. We don’t make our soap, shoes, TVs, cycles and pharmaceuticals for this caste or that. And, we would wish to recruit our work force from all communities based on competence and productivity.

It’s high time we spoke up for industry and commerce and declared that we don’t believe in religious rights or minority rights, but only in human rights.

Business Can & Must Act

For these economic reasons alone – and without even touching on the more fundamental ethical, social and cultural issues — we have a duty to take an unequivocal, public position in advocating at least the following:

• The government of the state — on its own or seeking whatever assistance if needs — must ensure the maintenance of law and order throughout the state, in an impartial and non–partisan manner.
• Extraordinary efforts must be made, swiftly, to bring to book the culprits of Godhra; and to identify the key leaders of the riots and the genocide that ensued. Special courts or judicial procedures should be put in place to accomplish this.
• If the government is tardy in its response, every support and assistance must be given to the Citizens’ Public Inquiry Commissions that may have to be set up, chaired by eminent retired judges, to carry out independent investigations and place their findings before the public. (This was done in Mumbai after the 1992/93 riots and only then did the true facts of what happened emerge, thus permitting charges to be framed against the culprits.)

If the government attempts to obstruct such efforts, we must publicly resist them. Once the opportunity to book culprits is lost, the seeds of new terrorism will be sown.

• We should extend unqualified support to the rehabilitation programmes under formulation by CII’s Gujarat chapter; and those already being run by voluntary organisations; offering finance and human resources.
• We should accord the highest priority, in the plans of CII, to build back business confidence and restore economic activity in the state.
• CII should ask to become involved in planning projects relating to upgradation of services and infrastructure in the Walled City of Ahmedabad, where living conditions have remained conducive, over decades, to eruption of disturbances at regular intervals.
• In the longer term, CII should endorse and lend support to the creation of Mohalla Committees (along the lines of those in Mumbai, Bhiwandi and Vadodara) to create more "Ram–Rahim tekdas."
• CII should join the voices against politically motivated transfers by government, of upright and capable civil servants and police officers. CII has a vested interest in ensuring that administration remains in clean and competent hands.
• If we don’t have the time to do voluntary work ourselves, can we enable our womenfolk — (behind every manager stands a great woman) — to spend time with voluntary organisations to pacify the disconsolate and render relief to the thousands of victims in relief camps?
• Above all, we shall have to stop being a silent constituency and gather courage — as Deepak Parikh of HDFC did yesterday — to speak up for upholding the secular values in our Constitution.

We should condemn fundamentalist leaders of all religions. Bhindranwale never spoke for all Sikhs; neither the Imam Bukhari nor Shahabuddin speak for all Muslims; nor do Ashok Singhal or Uma Bharti speak for all Hindus.

Show the Way:

With tens of thousands of Muslims huddled in relief camps, and with government reluctant to reach out to them as they should, can we, as individuals, make any difference?

I’d like to close by quoting Professor Bandukwala, who barely escaped with his life from Vadodara while his house and library were gutted by the mobs. In a recent talk at Bombay, full of compassion and wisdom, he recalled a fable of Tagore, about a man on the shore watching the sun set over the sea.

The sun proclaimed "Now, darkness will descend, and you will be lost." The humble man, who was with his family and friends lit a small candle and said, "this is no sun, but it will give us light enough to find our way."

Thank you.

(We have reproduced above the full text of his address at the CII Gujarat Annual Day, Ahmedabad, 30 March 2002)

Archived from Communalism Combat, July 2002 Year 8  No. 79, Forum

The post Is secularism good for business? appeared first on SabrangIndia.